Hacker News Reader

Comment by coldpie | Hacker News Reader

You don't understand what this case is about. This is about copyrighting API descriptions. Not copying code, but reimplementing an API that someone else created. Think about how many people created each part of the various web APIs. Is XmlHTTPRequest now owned by Microsoft? Who invented the Blink tag? Who owns which parts of the SQL language? The entire software industry is built on the idea that APIs are not copyrightable. If you thought software patent trolling was bad, buddy, you ain't see nothin' yet.

View on HN

This is why clear copyright and licensing is so important. Unless something is in the public domain, don't use it unless you have permission.

> The entire software industry is built on the idea that APIs are not copyrightable.

The entire open source movement was built on copyright (ala FSF and the GPL). So this doesn't even make sense. It's not anarchy as you imply and copyright has a purpose.

Also, copyright is far more limited than patents. Patents are dangerous because it's like claiming ownership over a mathematical formula that anyone can derive. It's completely different.

hehe this is the correct answer. basically if i make my own FileWriter class and choose to name one of the methods in that class "write()", then I'm infringing on Oracle XD

Wonder what happens if I call it "_write()"

void DocumentScribbler.scribble(String s)

Using String as a ProgType(tm)? That's a paddlin'. We use CharGroup around here, which we are willing to license for a small fee. For a limited time, get 10% off when you license three or more ProgTypes(tm)! Indemnification licensed separately. Contact our enterprise relations desk for details.

And then when you contact them it goes to voicemail, they call you back 9 times 3 days later and sell your email address to everyone under the sun :)

OH and then when theyre about to drop in stock price because they dont know how to deliver valuable products, they use the US government to force other companies to buy their product otherwise the US government will kick that prospective customer out of US markets ^.^

You've excluded a huge amount of middle ground. There's a comprise somewhere in the middle that allows compatability but stops blatant copying.

OK, but that's not what this case is about.

The compromise is pay Oracle money. Just open your wallet and pay, Oracle will tell you when to stop.

> There's a comprise somewhere in the middle that allows computability but stops blatant copying.

Did you mean to say compatibility rather than computability?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com